Page view counter

Should I Wait For 1.1?

In response to one of my earlier blog posts I was asked this question:

 

"As I get started with Silverlight, should I wait until 1.1 comes out?  Would I have to scrap all my 1.0 efforts when 1.1 releases?"

 

The truth is I've been asked this in various ways by many people, and it concerns me a great deal because it means we are doing a poor job getting the message across that the answer is an unequivocal "No, Why Wait? Nearly everything you learn in 1.0 will move cleanly to 1.1"

Silverlight 1.0 is ready to go, and all the skills you learn with Silverlight 1.0 (other than (perhaps) getting good at Java-script) will apply to 1.1 and beyond. There is a great deal you can do in 1.0 today and getting started now has tremendous advantages. Take a look at the Major League Baseball showcase application for an idea of the kind of application that can be build with 1.0 (okay, yes, they added some of their own extensions to go as far as they did).

I know, from previous posts, that some folks are waiting eagerly (as am I) for 1.1 and the inclusion of the CLR, for managed code, etc. etc. I'm not suggesting that Silverlight won't improve, of course it will, nor that 1.1 won't be better than 1.0, (or for that matter that 2.0 won't be better than 1.0, and so forth). What I am suggesting is that you may not want to write off 1.0 -- because it turns out to be a heck of a powerful tool, and you can get started today learning how to build Silverlight applications with a fully baked version.

Uh oh; that sounded dangerously like marketing. Okay, strike that. My enthusiasm does tend to get out of control. Let me try again... As a developer, what I see is a powerful tool that is being overshadowed by the promise of its own future; and I'd like to help provide the tools that other developers need to make use of the Silverlight we have today, so that we're all in a position to hit the ground at full speed as Silverlight evolves.

Listen, the marketing department is great; I have all the respect in the world for what they do, but I'm not in marketing I'm in development, so anytime I sound like I'm in marketing, please hit me hard with a dope slap.

Thanks.

 -jesse

Published 17 August 2007 09:53 AM by jesseliberty

Comments

# Should I Wait For 1.1? - Jesse Liberty - Silverlight Geek said on 17 August, 2007 10:35 AM

Pingback from  Should I Wait For 1.1? - Jesse Liberty - Silverlight Geek

# Palermo4 said on 17 August, 2007 03:58 PM

After my alter-ego determined he was qualified to get started with Silverlight development, he began

# WynApse said on 17 August, 2007 07:37 PM

Silverlight Cream for August 17, 2007

# JadedOmega said on 18 August, 2007 12:49 AM

I'm just picking up all of the .net architecture, mostly because I was bored. And I would advise most of the newer people to SL to start with 1.1, if for no other reason than you don't have to remember the hundreds of new classes(because they get generalized in javascript)

which lets you learn more of the programming patterns instead of tedious datatypes

# jesseliberty said on 18 August, 2007 10:25 AM

JadedOmega:

I'm not sure I understand how starting with 1.1 saves you having to remember hundreds of new classes. Can you say a bit more about that, or give a concrete example?

In any caes, it is important to remember that 1.0 is fully baked and won't have breaking changes,  whereas 1.1 is ALPHA and will certainly be changing before release.

Thanks.

# sl101 said on 18 August, 2007 11:08 AM

Should I wait for UI Controls? Yes

Do I like coding javascript? No

Silverlight was WPF/e please let us know what the e means.  We know it means no 3D a nd thats fine but what subset of controls (UI and Layout) are comming over. It would be nice to have some idea of the MS plan so that we can plan our projects.

Personally we have chosen to get familiar with WPF while waiting on 1.1 and dropped a year of Flex development in anticipation of dotnet running in the browser.

Your comments are greatly appreciated.

# palermo4 said on 18 August, 2007 08:53 PM

sl101,

WPF/E... E=Everywhere.

# j_programmer said on 20 August, 2007 09:19 AM

Thanks for the post.  I appreciate your comments, and while I understand that Silverlight itself can be understood absent from a particular language, that is the only benefit I can see.  That is also a major benefit.  But having to use lots and lots of javascript when I am used to .NET seems daunting, especially, when 1.1 appears to be coming soon.  Why would I want to invest all the time with javascript, when I can wait on what I already know?

I admit is tempting, but I feel like it will be a waste of time because sooner or later I'm going to have to go back and maintain that javascript, if I build anything serious.  And if I don't build anything serious with it, what's the point in spending serious time with it?  To learn, yes, but when you take on the new technology simply to learn the basics it makes it hard to take it seriously as something to use right now.  I also do not relish making all the controls from scratch and hope that Visual Studio and/or Blend will have drag and drop UI controls like we are used to with forms.  I've been waiting a long time on something like this from Microsoft.  I guess I can wait a little while longer, but, who knows, temptation may be the best of me.

# j_programmer said on 20 August, 2007 09:38 AM

Sorry for the double post, but in the article linked to on Silverlight.net has this interesting comment that puts into words exactly what I believe many of use .NET folks are thinking:

The version of Silverlight you choose to introduce to a new project will likely depend on your development team's skill set. If your development team primarily does heavy ASP.NET server-side development (mostly C# and VB.NET), you should wait until Silverlight 1.1 is available. If your team is adept at client-side languages like JavaScript, Silverlight 1.0 is a great platform to introduce.

www.cio.com/.../2

This, interestingly, is by Shawn Wildermuth, one of the video tutorial creators on the Silverlight.net site.

He also says on page four:

If you plan to create applications that are primarily replacements for data-driven desktop applications, you might miss the lack of basic controls and data binding in Silverlight. Silverlight is not a replacement for Windows Forms, WPF, Java Applets or Sharepoint. Simply put, Silverlight was not designed to do line of business applications in these early versions. But if you want to create rich, compelling applications with reach across platforms and operating systems, Silverlight is a good fit.

And now I'm not sure if I want to use it at all, at the moment.  I need Silverlight to do serious things.  I don't know what it means to create "rich, compelling applications" that cannot do "line of business" things.  I remember Scott Guthrie's airline demo.  That looks like a business application to me, and that's the kind of thing I want to do.  He concludes with, "Now is the time to determine where to use Silverlight in your own Web strategy."  Honestly, I have no idea now.

# jesseliberty said on 20 August, 2007 12:01 PM

Re: Shawn's article. Shawn is a great and very smart guy, but of course he was offering his opinion. I'll ask if he'll stop by to clarify, because I'm sure it wasn't his intention to leave you less certain than before he began.

I think the feeling among most folks who have worked with SL 1.0 is that there are a lot of very serious very powerful things you can do with SL 1.0 (see the Major League Baseball show case application), and there will be more things that you can do more easily as Silverlight matures.

1.1 will be a major milestone, but it won't be the only one. It isn't as if we'll release 1.1 and stop; there will always be something new and cool coming, and if we do things right, there will always be the Silverlight you are using, and the Silverlight that you are experimenting with while it is in alpha/beta.

A couple months ago I gave a presentation on .NET 3.5 to about 300 working professional programmers. They were all very interested, but about 1/2 way into the presentation I learned that about 2/3 of them were still using .NET 1.0 at work; their companies were very reluctant to move up to .NET 2.0!

Adoption rates certainly vary; and depending on what you are doing, and how many folks you have to train, and how quickly your folks pick up new technology, and what bang you see for your buck, etc. etc., you may decide to wait, to learn wpf first, to start with 1.0 or to start with 1.1. These are all reasonable decisions; all I'm arguing is that there is no a priori reason to discount 1.0 as a "toy."

In any case, my job isn't to convince anyone to use anything; it is merely to facilitate the use of whichever version you choose to use, and to provide you with the tools, information and supportive community you need to do so.

-j

# Joshua said on 07 September, 2007 12:07 AM
# jackinthegreen said on 07 September, 2007 12:27 PM

Remember Atlas? Ignore the hype and spin. if you're a .net coder, wait patiently for 1.1, IMHO. MS, as always, is casting about frantically to react to it's competitors and to open-source iniiatives. loyal but naive web devs get victimized by these spasms for fear of being left behind the "next big thing".

Take a deep breath, play around with 1.1 to get familiarized, and be ready for the mature release. (and take interest-conflicted MS bloggers opinions with a healthy grain of salt)

Cheers